spec: INTENT-3 — dual-method registrations, method-keyed replacement, precise required-slot semantics

[JarbasAl]

Internal-purity refinement of OVOS-INTENT-3, aligning the intent model with the OVOS-INTENT-4 wire contract.

Changes

• Dual-method intents (§2): an intent is defined by one or both of the two methods. Each individual registration still uses exactly one method — the shapes are never mixed within one registration — and an intent MAY carry one registration per method, as two training-data representations of the same handler (INTENT-4 §3.2). This removes the contradiction where INTENT-3 said "exactly one method" while INTENT-4 keys registration and replacement by method.
• Method-keyed replacement (§6.1): replacement is keyed on the (skill id, intent name, language, method) quadruple; registering one method leaves the other method's registration for the same triple untouched.
• Required-slot failure (§5.3): stated precisely — when a required slot is absent from the match result, the engine MUST treat the intent as unmatched for that utterance; it MAY internally consider other templates of the same intent before concluding the intent is unmatched.
• Wording hygiene: "slots map" normalized to "slot map" throughout; the slot-typing deferral restated as out of scope alongside the normalization it depends on (matching the INTENT-1 companion change); the "this one — the last —" dependency-order aside dropped.

CHANGELOG entry appended under the spec's current class. Version field unchanged: per VERSIONING.md it is a V1/V2 compatibility class, and these refinements do not change class.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@JarbasAl, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 52 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 63b45430-50a3-48e2-a679-f2fe00c8f504

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9003dcd and da75289.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• CHANGELOG.md
• intent-3.md

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch spec/intent-3

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}